Difference in the response to angiotensin II between left and right ventricular endocardial endothelial cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies focused on the right ventricular endocardial endothelial cells (EECRs) and showed that angiotensin II (Ang II) induced increase in cytosolic and nuclear calcium via AT1 receptor activation. In the present study, we verified whether the response of left EECs (EECLs) to Ang II is different than that of EECRs. Our results showed that the EC50 of the Ang II-induced increase of cytosolic and nuclear calcium in EECLs was 10× higher (around 2 × 10−13 mol/L) than in EECRs (around 8 × 10−12 mol/L). The densities of both AT1 and AT2 receptors were also higher in EECLs than those previously reported in EECRs. The effect of Ang II was mediated in both cell types via the activation of AT1 receptors. Treatment with Ang II induced a significant increase of cytosolic and nuclear AT1 receptors in EECRs, whereas the opposite was found in EECLs. In both cell types, there was a transient increase of cytosolic and nuclear AT2 receptors following the Ang II treatment. In conclusion, our results showed that both AT1 and AT2 receptors densities are higher in both EECLs compared to what was reported in EECRs. The higher density of AT1 receptors in EECLs compared to REECs may explain, in part, the higher sensitivity of EECLs to Ang II.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".